Will Fusion ever operate on macs running on Apple Silicon chips as it’s important that I can continue to run my x64 Linux vm images if I upgrade to a new Apple silicon based Mac
I couldn’t see any official comment on this from VMware
It's not a law, it's a contract, and the terms are WW. I expect that Parallels is just ignoring the issue and/or VMWare's lawyers are overly cautious.
I think you're right though, cloud is definitely going to be a major piece of the puzzle.
But Parallels is not licensing Windows for the user. They are only developing the type 2 hypervisor. Different areas have different laws. If it was enforceable to prevent Parallels from enabling Windows 10 on ARM running in Parallels, Microsoft would simply sue Corel (owner of Parallels) to stop and get renumeration for their activities. The legal issues are too complex and would likely waste too much time and cause a major headache to sort out. As for me, Windows is now irrelevant and has been so for long time before I upgraded to the M1 Mac mini.
Agreed with you that we have to make our own decisions on the tool set that enables us to do "what we want to do".
Apple Silicon is a both a curse and a blessing.
Curse: those that depend on x86 virtualization for Windows and "do everything on a Mac" are left with a difficult decision to say the least.
Blessings: performance and the ability to run iOS/iPadOS applications on my M1 Mac mini. It also appears that there's a lot of open source code that runs on Apple Silicon. Examples: my latest interests have taken me to Arduino and Fritzing - both of which run very well on Apple Silicon. And for esoterica - GNU APL compiling from source. Bring along containerization/Docker and there may very well be a new "golden age" for the Mac.
I will be very interested to see what the follow-on M-series processors will bring.
@Technogeezer it is going to be interesting. I was thinking the other day that it would be cool if Apple did a M1 Pro that would have something like 16 cores both general purpose and graphics cores. Looking at the Fujitsu supercomputer processor design, you can see some of the performance you can get from the ARM platform.
No, but they had to do it in order to write the support code. Now they may have ignored the EULA thinking that MSFT wouldn't come after them. That's a risk decision. VMWare's attorneys probably had a different tolerance.
As you say though, it is what it is. I'm planning on getting an M2 machine day of release, and don't plan on having virtualization of windows available, so I'm in the process of looking for alternatives across the board. It's been a great ride, and I'll miss the CYA option that Fusion/windows provided, but the performance gains are just too significant to skip.
I have a feeling the new 16" is going to be amazing...
@dlhotka, well if Microsoft could make a case against Parallels, then they would. Also Parallels says that that feature of running Windows is only supported in the intel version. I upgraded to the M1 chip because I realized that Windows no longer relevant for my workloads. Everything that I use runs on Macintosh. I do indeed love the increased performance over the 2018 intel Core i7 Mac mini. I did enjoy the idea of being able to run Windows on the Mac mini when I first upgraded to the Macintosh. Now that I have finished my migration, and have not used Windows over the last few years, I realized that it was time to stop using virtualization and that I no longer need Windows.
Anyway, Connectix and Microsoft once managed to emulate Intel on PPC, and with a quite decent speed, with Virtual PC for Mac, so it should be possible to do something similar - emulate Intel on ARM - also today (and M1/M2 is also much more capable, as a host): of course, if it’s not seen as convenient from a business point of view, then probably it won’t be done. So, OS enthusiasts and other power users will have to look elsewhere (let’s hope that Qemu and UTM will improve, with time)…
And then there's this: https://www.vmware.com/products/horizon-cloud-virtual-desktops.html
If it eventually makes it into the single-user option for a decent spec environment, that'd be a powerful option.
It really does seem like everyone wants to push toward the cloud. I guess that means the end of desktop hypervisors, at least commercially. I think that the open source world (except VirtualBox which never worked well) will fill the gap.
> I feel sorry for you to have such a strict requirement on the architecture of the computer.
No need to feel sorry. I can use system-level x86 emulation. No ties to VMware or Apple.
> You will miss the shear joy of using one of the best designed operating systems.
No I won't. Any reasonable Unix/Posix or Win/WSL will do. Plus a terminal. Plus a browser.
In other words: Apple's choice, in a twisted sense, actually freed me from their walled garden.
Welcome to the walled garden of lower performance solutions, mainly intel x86. Apple's decision was to quit relying on the poor capabilities and poor quality of intel products. Keep in mind that the top supercomputer does not run X86-64, but ARM. You will miss the better system as you will be spending a ton more time keeping things working. Windows 10 on ARM runs 32 bit and 64 bit intel code currently. Real modern computing does not require a terminal or browser. There is no Apple Walled Garden, that is only a myth brought about by people who are jealous of Apple. Enjoy your lower performance hardware. Apple made the a great decision to build their own processors. I love the fact that my iPhone can outperform many intel based desktops and notebooks. I hope that you are happy with your downgrade as we will not miss you.
Note that the blog is asking for feedback to correct the business case. Feel free to do so folks. Here's a stab:
-Right now for all shipping VMware software past and present... that VM is intel.
-VMs can easily be made that travel from fusion to workstation to ESXi and back with minimal planning. That's gone.
-Seamless integration between Fusion and workload vSphere loads- Hmm.. that's gone.
-How many people are really using fusion to run linux.. except Dr Jim and me running Kali?
-How many people have been maintaining a windows or other VM for YEARS to do some special task that's going to stop working? Like interface with your car computer... or some dedicated thing like an ASUS router updater that has to run on intel windows? That's not going to work
-Home lab users trying stuff in emulated sphere? That will _kind of_ work. But all workloads are currently intel and you're not really testing that are you?
-No Mac OS emulation? So the Mac hypervisor doesn't support Mac? What about our old Adobe apps that still work great on Sierra or some older OS.... ?
-Taking that step further, what about those of us who were using Fusion to keep Apple from completely breaking us by emulating the last OS.... Feelin like you just jumped out the plane and forgot your 'chute?
So maybe a few of those.
… And now, there is also this (interesting, BTW):
… with a full Windows 10/11 environment streamed inside Microsoft Edge (and maybe also other browsers): however, how would this integrate, for example, with the Mac (see VMware Tools-like functionality)…?
… And now, there is also this (interesting, BTW):
… with a full Windows 10/11 environment streamed inside Microsoft Edge (and maybe also other browsers): however, how would this integrate, for example, with the Mac (se VMware Tools-like functionality)…?
I'm still wondering if this isn't just a fancy way of saying RDP support for MS Edge for VM's hosted on Azure.
Not much is known, yet, anyway: only that it will be a subscription service, initially for business and enterprise users; hopefully, cheaper pro and home user versions will follow (which could be interesting for M1 Mac users, at least initially)…
@wila I saw this announcement too. It makes total sense for Microsoft to provide a desktop as a cloud service for Azure’s commercial customers. Many enterprise customers run VDI solutions in house and having a cloud option is in line with “cloud first” initiatives.
I thought the same thing about RDP and Azure VMs when I saw this. Sounds very similar to technology that already exists. The big work though may be a making it easier to use to make the service easier to consume.
If they ever release it to consumers, it will be interesting to see the reaction. Plenty of people don’t like subscriptions - what will they think about the “pay for what you use” nature of Azure..
I think it's similar to shadow.tech, but with a business focus instead of gamers. They hint at a GPU option for the latter in the future. And of course, SteamDeck was just announced too.